Between automatic and control processes: How relationships between problem elements interact to facilitate or impede insight
Solving a problem requires relating the pieces of information available to each other and to the solution. We investigated how the strength of these relationships determines the likelihood of solving insight tasks based on remote associates. In these tasks, the solver is provided with several cues (...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Memory & cognition 2022-11, Vol.50 (8), p.1719-1734 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1734 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 1719 |
container_title | Memory & cognition |
container_volume | 50 |
creator | Becker, Maxi Davis, Simon Cabeza, Roberto |
description | Solving a problem requires relating the pieces of information available to each other and to the solution. We investigated how the strength of these relationships determines the likelihood of solving insight tasks based on remote associates. In these tasks, the solver is provided with several cues (e.g.,
drop
,
coat
,
summer
) and has to find the solution that matches those cues (e.g.,
rain
). We measured the semantic similarity between the cues and the solution (
cue–solution similarity
) as well as between cues (
cue–cue similarity
). We assume those relationships modulate two basic processes underlying insight problem-solving. First, there is an
automatic activation process
whereby conceptual activation spreads across a semantic network from each cue node to their associated nodes, potentially reaching the node of the solution. Thus, in general, the higher cue–solution similarity, the more likely the solution will be found (Prediction 1). Second, there is a
controlled search process
focused on an area in semantic space whose radius depends on competing cue–cue similarity. High cue–cue similarity will bias a search for the solution close to the provided cues because the associated nodes shared by both cues are highly coactivated. Therefore, high cue–cue similarity will have a beneficial effect when the cue–solution similarity is high but a detrimental effect when cue–solution similarity is low (Prediction 2). Our two predictions were confirmed using both verbal and pictorial remote association tasks, supporting the view that insight is dependent on an interaction of meaningful relationships between cues and solutions, and clarify the mechanisms of insight problem solving in remote associates. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3758/s13421-022-01277-3 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9767997</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2637583227</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-397a891ada1ccfdf420fad00b8b88cdd12cf6f96415fd2607b61022566024ed53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhS0EokPhD7BAltiwCfgR2zELpFIBRarEBiR2lmPfzLhK4mA7VEj98fUwQ3ks2NiL-53je3wQekrJS65E9ypT3jLaEMYaQplSDb-HNlRw1gjdyvtoQ4gmjSDs6wl6lPMVIUQILR-iEy6YJFqTDbp5C-UaYMZ2LXGyJThsZ49dnEuKI15SdJAz5Nf4Il7jBGNF4px3Ycm4P0or1I8wYagHzCXjMBdI1hVcIh6sC2MotgCOCYdpAQ8VyGG7K4_Rg8GOGZ4c71P05f27z-cXzeWnDx_Pzy4bJ1hXGq6V7TS13lLnBj-0jAzWE9J3fdc57ylzgxy0bKkYfA2meknrpwgpCWvBC36K3hx8l7WfwLu6ZLKjWVKYbPphog3m78kcdmYbvxutpNJaVYMXR4MUv62Qi5lCdjCOdoa4ZsPkvhDO2B59_g96Fdc013iGKaEoazlllWIHyqWYc4LhbhlKzN7LHMo1NYf5Wa7hVfTszxh3kl9tVoAfgFxH8xbS77f_Y3sL1cSzUg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2757124312</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Between automatic and control processes: How relationships between problem elements interact to facilitate or impede insight</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Becker, Maxi ; Davis, Simon ; Cabeza, Roberto</creator><creatorcontrib>Becker, Maxi ; Davis, Simon ; Cabeza, Roberto</creatorcontrib><description>Solving a problem requires relating the pieces of information available to each other and to the solution. We investigated how the strength of these relationships determines the likelihood of solving insight tasks based on remote associates. In these tasks, the solver is provided with several cues (e.g.,
drop
,
coat
,
summer
) and has to find the solution that matches those cues (e.g.,
rain
). We measured the semantic similarity between the cues and the solution (
cue–solution similarity
) as well as between cues (
cue–cue similarity
). We assume those relationships modulate two basic processes underlying insight problem-solving. First, there is an
automatic activation process
whereby conceptual activation spreads across a semantic network from each cue node to their associated nodes, potentially reaching the node of the solution. Thus, in general, the higher cue–solution similarity, the more likely the solution will be found (Prediction 1). Second, there is a
controlled search process
focused on an area in semantic space whose radius depends on competing cue–cue similarity. High cue–cue similarity will bias a search for the solution close to the provided cues because the associated nodes shared by both cues are highly coactivated. Therefore, high cue–cue similarity will have a beneficial effect when the cue–solution similarity is high but a detrimental effect when cue–solution similarity is low (Prediction 2). Our two predictions were confirmed using both verbal and pictorial remote association tasks, supporting the view that insight is dependent on an interaction of meaningful relationships between cues and solutions, and clarify the mechanisms of insight problem solving in remote associates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-502X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-5946</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3758/s13421-022-01277-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35260990</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Animal cognition ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Cognitive Psychology ; Cues ; Humans ; Memory ; Predictions ; Probability ; Problem solving ; Problem Solving - physiology ; Psychology ; Semantics</subject><ispartof>Memory & cognition, 2022-11, Vol.50 (8), p.1719-1734</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><rights>2022. The Author(s).</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Nov 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-397a891ada1ccfdf420fad00b8b88cdd12cf6f96415fd2607b61022566024ed53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-397a891ada1ccfdf420fad00b8b88cdd12cf6f96415fd2607b61022566024ed53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9430-4077</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/s13421-022-01277-3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13421-022-01277-3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35260990$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Becker, Maxi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cabeza, Roberto</creatorcontrib><title>Between automatic and control processes: How relationships between problem elements interact to facilitate or impede insight</title><title>Memory & cognition</title><addtitle>Mem Cogn</addtitle><addtitle>Mem Cognit</addtitle><description>Solving a problem requires relating the pieces of information available to each other and to the solution. We investigated how the strength of these relationships determines the likelihood of solving insight tasks based on remote associates. In these tasks, the solver is provided with several cues (e.g.,
drop
,
coat
,
summer
) and has to find the solution that matches those cues (e.g.,
rain
). We measured the semantic similarity between the cues and the solution (
cue–solution similarity
) as well as between cues (
cue–cue similarity
). We assume those relationships modulate two basic processes underlying insight problem-solving. First, there is an
automatic activation process
whereby conceptual activation spreads across a semantic network from each cue node to their associated nodes, potentially reaching the node of the solution. Thus, in general, the higher cue–solution similarity, the more likely the solution will be found (Prediction 1). Second, there is a
controlled search process
focused on an area in semantic space whose radius depends on competing cue–cue similarity. High cue–cue similarity will bias a search for the solution close to the provided cues because the associated nodes shared by both cues are highly coactivated. Therefore, high cue–cue similarity will have a beneficial effect when the cue–solution similarity is high but a detrimental effect when cue–solution similarity is low (Prediction 2). Our two predictions were confirmed using both verbal and pictorial remote association tasks, supporting the view that insight is dependent on an interaction of meaningful relationships between cues and solutions, and clarify the mechanisms of insight problem solving in remote associates.</description><subject>Animal cognition</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Problem solving</subject><subject>Problem Solving - physiology</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><issn>0090-502X</issn><issn>1532-5946</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhS0EokPhD7BAltiwCfgR2zELpFIBRarEBiR2lmPfzLhK4mA7VEj98fUwQ3ks2NiL-53je3wQekrJS65E9ypT3jLaEMYaQplSDb-HNlRw1gjdyvtoQ4gmjSDs6wl6lPMVIUQILR-iEy6YJFqTDbp5C-UaYMZ2LXGyJThsZ49dnEuKI15SdJAz5Nf4Il7jBGNF4px3Ycm4P0or1I8wYagHzCXjMBdI1hVcIh6sC2MotgCOCYdpAQ8VyGG7K4_Rg8GOGZ4c71P05f27z-cXzeWnDx_Pzy4bJ1hXGq6V7TS13lLnBj-0jAzWE9J3fdc57ylzgxy0bKkYfA2meknrpwgpCWvBC36K3hx8l7WfwLu6ZLKjWVKYbPphog3m78kcdmYbvxutpNJaVYMXR4MUv62Qi5lCdjCOdoa4ZsPkvhDO2B59_g96Fdc013iGKaEoazlllWIHyqWYc4LhbhlKzN7LHMo1NYf5Wa7hVfTszxh3kl9tVoAfgFxH8xbS77f_Y3sL1cSzUg</recordid><startdate>20221101</startdate><enddate>20221101</enddate><creator>Becker, Maxi</creator><creator>Davis, Simon</creator><creator>Cabeza, Roberto</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9430-4077</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221101</creationdate><title>Between automatic and control processes: How relationships between problem elements interact to facilitate or impede insight</title><author>Becker, Maxi ; Davis, Simon ; Cabeza, Roberto</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c528t-397a891ada1ccfdf420fad00b8b88cdd12cf6f96415fd2607b61022566024ed53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Animal cognition</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Problem solving</topic><topic>Problem Solving - physiology</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Becker, Maxi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cabeza, Roberto</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Nursing & Allied Health Source</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health Medical collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Memory & cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Becker, Maxi</au><au>Davis, Simon</au><au>Cabeza, Roberto</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Between automatic and control processes: How relationships between problem elements interact to facilitate or impede insight</atitle><jtitle>Memory & cognition</jtitle><stitle>Mem Cogn</stitle><addtitle>Mem Cognit</addtitle><date>2022-11-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1719</spage><epage>1734</epage><pages>1719-1734</pages><issn>0090-502X</issn><eissn>1532-5946</eissn><abstract>Solving a problem requires relating the pieces of information available to each other and to the solution. We investigated how the strength of these relationships determines the likelihood of solving insight tasks based on remote associates. In these tasks, the solver is provided with several cues (e.g.,
drop
,
coat
,
summer
) and has to find the solution that matches those cues (e.g.,
rain
). We measured the semantic similarity between the cues and the solution (
cue–solution similarity
) as well as between cues (
cue–cue similarity
). We assume those relationships modulate two basic processes underlying insight problem-solving. First, there is an
automatic activation process
whereby conceptual activation spreads across a semantic network from each cue node to their associated nodes, potentially reaching the node of the solution. Thus, in general, the higher cue–solution similarity, the more likely the solution will be found (Prediction 1). Second, there is a
controlled search process
focused on an area in semantic space whose radius depends on competing cue–cue similarity. High cue–cue similarity will bias a search for the solution close to the provided cues because the associated nodes shared by both cues are highly coactivated. Therefore, high cue–cue similarity will have a beneficial effect when the cue–solution similarity is high but a detrimental effect when cue–solution similarity is low (Prediction 2). Our two predictions were confirmed using both verbal and pictorial remote association tasks, supporting the view that insight is dependent on an interaction of meaningful relationships between cues and solutions, and clarify the mechanisms of insight problem solving in remote associates.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>35260990</pmid><doi>10.3758/s13421-022-01277-3</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9430-4077</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0090-502X |
ispartof | Memory & cognition, 2022-11, Vol.50 (8), p.1719-1734 |
issn | 0090-502X 1532-5946 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9767997 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Animal cognition Behavioral Science and Psychology Cognitive Psychology Cues Humans Memory Predictions Probability Problem solving Problem Solving - physiology Psychology Semantics |
title | Between automatic and control processes: How relationships between problem elements interact to facilitate or impede insight |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T18%3A46%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Between%20automatic%20and%20control%20processes:%20How%20relationships%20between%20problem%20elements%20interact%20to%20facilitate%20or%20impede%20insight&rft.jtitle=Memory%20&%20cognition&rft.au=Becker,%20Maxi&rft.date=2022-11-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1719&rft.epage=1734&rft.pages=1719-1734&rft.issn=0090-502X&rft.eissn=1532-5946&rft_id=info:doi/10.3758/s13421-022-01277-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2637583227%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2757124312&rft_id=info:pmid/35260990&rfr_iscdi=true |